Do any of you have any idea of what airplane will replacement the SR-71 Blackbird
i read there were plans to build a new airplane called the Blackswift Swoops in 2008 and now in 2012 nothing
I also found this http://www.thelivingmoon.com/45jack_...paceplane.html saying all the airplane that can replace the SR-71 Blackbird but non have been built

Satellite orbits are hard and expensive to modify, it's not like the movies where you just click on something and a satellite moves into position. The U2 is still in operation and there is one SR71 being flown for "research."
Having drones all over the place is the future-

Hi kingofking. Yes, the SR-71 could go fast, but there is a whole lot more to consider than simply the all out speed. In fact, in the age of the drones that are available to the military, the SR-71 may actually take a lot longer to get the required pictures/data to those that need it, and has been rendered obsolete. Here is why I say this:

#1-The SR-71 could not just operate out of any airport. That means that there would be a certain amount of transit time from home base to the target. Due to design limits of the SR-71, this would also include at least one aerial refueling. Not to mention the time to brief the crews and prepare the aircraft....even before the takeoff.

#2-Considering point #1, even if the SR-71 was updated ($$$) to provide the same real time downlink for the data/video, the time to target might just be a whole lot more than a drone that could be flown from a remote operating base less than 100 miles from the target area. Even if the drone's base was 300 miles away, it could still get there sooner at 150mph than an SR-71 coming from halfway around the globe at mach 3. Especially once you factor in briefing, startup, launch, in-flight refuel, and then setting up the ingress to target.

#3-An SR-71 travelling at Mach 3 really only gives the equipment time for 1 pass over the target. A drone flying at a slower speed can orbit the target and provide more detailed, more up to date info for a longer period of time.

#4-A drone operating from a forward operating base close to the target could make multiple sorties over the target area in the same time an SR-71 could make one flight, one pass, and see ya again tomorrow

#5-Cost. An SR-71 has two VERY thirsty engines. Requires a minumum of 1 in-flight refueling, so now you also have a tanker out flying around to put gas into. Most drones have 1 modern, fuel efficient turbofan engine....much easier on gas!! And that is not even touching the money involved in keeping the old SR-71 airframes flyable.

Really, no matter how you look at it, the drones have every advantage over the poor ole' Blackbird. Sure, it could go Mach 3 at 60,000ft or something like that, but in the modern battlefield it is just not the right tool anymore. All out speed just is not the number one factor, that would be time. A couple drones operating from right close to the action is considerably faster and more economical tool to the military than one aircraft halfway around the world.

May I point out that it's hard to hide an SR-71. The other side may not be able to shoot it down, but they can tell it's coming, and once it's gone, that it won't be back that quickly.

Also, putting a drone/UAS/RPV over a hot target risks only what should be a machine that can be sanitized (as the one we lost over Iran should have been). It doesn't risk putting an other "Gary Powers" into unfriendly hands.

I've seen, heard, and FELT the SR-71 taking off and landing, and I agree it's a magnificent machine, but I honestly believe its day is past.

you do not get what i am saying, i say how about turning the sr-71 into a drone

I do get what you are saying, go back and reread what I said before. Without meaning to come across as rude, you can't seem to get past the fact that all out speed of the aircraft i snot important anymore. Let me refresh with some quick quotes, and this time the important points are in red and bold.

Quote:

The SR-71 could not just operate out of any airport. That means that there would be a certain amount of transit time from home base to the target. Due to design limits of the SR-71, this would also include at least one aerial refueling.

Quote:

Even if the drone's base was 300 miles away, it could still get there sooner at 150mph than an SR-71 coming from halfway around the globe at mach 3.

Quote:

An SR-71 travelling at Mach 3 really only gives the equipment time for 1 pass over the target. A drone flying at a slower speed can orbit the target and provide more detailed, more up to date info for a longer period of time.

Quote:

Cost. An SR-71 has two VERY thirsty engines. Requires a minumum of 1 in-flight refueling, so now you also have a tanker out flying around to put gas into. Most drones have 1 modern, fuel efficient turbofan engine....much easier on gas!! And that is not even touching the money involved in keeping the old SR-71 airframes flyable.

Yes, the SR-71 can go Mach 3......who cares. That speed does not mean anything when the smaller drones have already been over the target transmitting info for an hour, and will still be there an hour after the SR-71 has passed. And then when you consider the cost factor of operating an SR-71......whew, no contest. And to convert it into a drone.......oh my, now we are really talking lots of money!!!!!!!

Seriously, with the more modern, cheaper to operate, easy to fly from anywhere equipment they have at their disposal now, the SR-71 is obsolete. There are some small drones that can even be transported in a jeep, allowing them to be launched right there at the battlefield, allowing instant reconnisance, no waiting. There is no, and I mean no, advantage to the SR-71 anymore....even with the all out speed. The only thing it is still good for is to be able to say "our airplane is faster than yours", thats about it.

The 71 also required its own special blend of fuel. It couldn't be fueled up long before takeoff because it would leak out all over the place. The support crews required to keep those finicky old birds working were expensive as well. I don't know the ratio of flight time compared to maintenance/prep time, but I'll bet it was somewhere around 100 hours of ground labor per hour of flight, and that's VERY conservative.
In the modern world, the SR71 is nothing more than a novelty and aside from being fast- has NOTHING to offer other than being used for high altitude research. There is still an operational 71 for that purpose.

There's a SR-71 Blackbird on display about a 30-minute drive from me - impressive aircraft.

For a replacement, there is the unmanned X-37B that has been in operation for awhile. It's in orbit now and has been for over a year, on a classified mission. A much larger `C' version is in the works.

Satellite orbits are hard and expensive to modify, it's not like the movies where you just click on something and a satellite moves into position. The U2 is still in operation and there is one SR71 being flown for "research."
Having drones all over the place is the future-